To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

CHALLENGING QUESTION
Catholic schools only ivay
By Father James J. Bacik
Much of the present discussion
about Catholic schools seems
superficial and narrow because it is
locked into one model and assumes
that one approach is best. I believe
that successful planning for the future
must be based on our willingness to
envision alternate approaches.
Many people enter the dicussion
today convinced that Catholic schools
are the best way to carry out our
religious education responsibilities.
They assume that all Catholic schools
should be maintained if at all possible.
They would not question the fact that
the bulk of our resources goes into our
schools.
For these people, the main problem
is securing more money from the state
or the Catholic people in order to
maintain our present school system.
With the prevalence of this attitude, it
is not surprising that the current
debate is dominated by financial
considerations and strategy for gaining
aid.
While money is obviously
important, I believe that intelligent
planning requires that we begin to
examine the assumption that Catholic
schools are necessarily the best or the
primary way of meeting our
responsibilites in religious education.
We could begin by recalling that
Jesus did not establish a school system
but a Church. He gave us the
command to preach and teach. Our
task is to share our Christian heritage
and to foster better understanding of
the Gospel in succeeding generations.
It is up to each age to determine the
best ways of carrying out this task.
Our forefathers in this country with
great energy and sacrifice built up an
impressive Catholic school system to
meet the demands of the times. We
best honor this heritage by continuing
to search for the means that best fit
our times. It cannot be assumed that
the methods of the past are always
adequate for the present.
Some people reject this whole line
of thought on the ground that our
youth will be greatly harmed if they
are denied the opportunity to attend
Catholic school. In response I would
offer these thoughts.
1) To open up the question of
alternatives does not mean
automatically closing Catholic schools.
In fact, an impressive case can be made
for them based on their real and
potential contributions. The advantage
is that we will see their role in a wider
perspective and as part of a total
approach.
2) There is evidence that
non-attendance does not cause the dire
effects that some envision. It can be
summarized by a statement in the
Greeley-Rossl study, where the
authors, in commenting on the
effectiveness of Catholic schools, point
out their value but then add
"apparently, Catholics who have not
attended them have not been
appreciably harmed by their
non-attendance." (The Education of
Catholic Americans by Andrew
Greeley and Peter Rossi p.117).
Although the authors themselves do
not conclude that experimentation is
desirable, I think it is reasonable to
assume that if people are not going to
be harmed by non-attendance, then we
should feel free to look for other
approaches without a nagging fear that
we are failing to do our best for the
youth.
3) There are positive indications
that a search for alternatives would be
pragmatically wise. Greeley and Rossi
say in the same study, "If our data
from the past are any indication of the
present situation, Catholic education is
virtually wasted on three-fourths of
those in Catholic schools because of
the absence of a sufficiently religious
family" (p.116). If this is true, then
perhaps we can find more efficient
means of using our limited resources
and meeting our responsibilities.
At this point it must be admitted
that it is true that there are no proven
alternatives to Catholic schools.
Nothing in the collected experience of
Protestants and Catholics in the U.S.
offers any obviously successful model
that we could easily adopt today.
However, in conjunction with the
points made above, it is at least
possible to accept this fact as a
challenge to continue to search, rather
than as a mandate for maintaining the
status quo.

CHALLENGING QUESTION
Catholic schools only ivay
By Father James J. Bacik
Much of the present discussion
about Catholic schools seems
superficial and narrow because it is
locked into one model and assumes
that one approach is best. I believe
that successful planning for the future
must be based on our willingness to
envision alternate approaches.
Many people enter the dicussion
today convinced that Catholic schools
are the best way to carry out our
religious education responsibilities.
They assume that all Catholic schools
should be maintained if at all possible.
They would not question the fact that
the bulk of our resources goes into our
schools.
For these people, the main problem
is securing more money from the state
or the Catholic people in order to
maintain our present school system.
With the prevalence of this attitude, it
is not surprising that the current
debate is dominated by financial
considerations and strategy for gaining
aid.
While money is obviously
important, I believe that intelligent
planning requires that we begin to
examine the assumption that Catholic
schools are necessarily the best or the
primary way of meeting our
responsibilites in religious education.
We could begin by recalling that
Jesus did not establish a school system
but a Church. He gave us the
command to preach and teach. Our
task is to share our Christian heritage
and to foster better understanding of
the Gospel in succeeding generations.
It is up to each age to determine the
best ways of carrying out this task.
Our forefathers in this country with
great energy and sacrifice built up an
impressive Catholic school system to
meet the demands of the times. We
best honor this heritage by continuing
to search for the means that best fit
our times. It cannot be assumed that
the methods of the past are always
adequate for the present.
Some people reject this whole line
of thought on the ground that our
youth will be greatly harmed if they
are denied the opportunity to attend
Catholic school. In response I would
offer these thoughts.
1) To open up the question of
alternatives does not mean
automatically closing Catholic schools.
In fact, an impressive case can be made
for them based on their real and
potential contributions. The advantage
is that we will see their role in a wider
perspective and as part of a total
approach.
2) There is evidence that
non-attendance does not cause the dire
effects that some envision. It can be
summarized by a statement in the
Greeley-Rossl study, where the
authors, in commenting on the
effectiveness of Catholic schools, point
out their value but then add
"apparently, Catholics who have not
attended them have not been
appreciably harmed by their
non-attendance." (The Education of
Catholic Americans by Andrew
Greeley and Peter Rossi p.117).
Although the authors themselves do
not conclude that experimentation is
desirable, I think it is reasonable to
assume that if people are not going to
be harmed by non-attendance, then we
should feel free to look for other
approaches without a nagging fear that
we are failing to do our best for the
youth.
3) There are positive indications
that a search for alternatives would be
pragmatically wise. Greeley and Rossi
say in the same study, "If our data
from the past are any indication of the
present situation, Catholic education is
virtually wasted on three-fourths of
those in Catholic schools because of
the absence of a sufficiently religious
family" (p.116). If this is true, then
perhaps we can find more efficient
means of using our limited resources
and meeting our responsibilities.
At this point it must be admitted
that it is true that there are no proven
alternatives to Catholic schools.
Nothing in the collected experience of
Protestants and Catholics in the U.S.
offers any obviously successful model
that we could easily adopt today.
However, in conjunction with the
points made above, it is at least
possible to accept this fact as a
challenge to continue to search, rather
than as a mandate for maintaining the
status quo.